Shocking, Sad, and Yet....
You know, I'm sort of out of the loop on what's in and what's out on dossiers with China these days. So, when I read the rumors on another blog, I had to ask the writer for clarification. If I understand the latest developments correctly, China rejected a handful of families waiting for referrals due to obesity. The families had waited over 10 months for this news and were devastated. How incredibly painful to discover a new criteria so late in the game and my heart goes out these people.
This whole thing got me thinking, is this new policy offensive because it reeks of discrimination or is it offensive because these people didn't know up front? I know some very heavy people who are wonderful parents. I know some very thin people who are horrible parents. Yet, no one ever said you can only be a parent if you're thin. What if someone did? What if China said, "People adopting must have a body mass index (bmi) under 30?" Most of us are probably guilty of caring a few extra pounds, may be even more than a few extra pounds...do we project ourselves into this scenario too easily for our own comfort? Does it seem too arbitrary? Are we just so politically correct we can't admit that China may have a point from a health perspective?
Let's face it: parenting small children is physically demanding. There is tons of lifting, lots of twisting into unnatural positions, countless hours chasing and more than a few nights spent sleeping (or not sleeping as the case may be) in random positions. This doesn't take into account the bathing, laundering or even lifting of kid stuff like strollers and car seats. With kids under 5, parenting is a highly physical task. Every now and again, parents get referred a wild child like my little one, and if you put a kid like Maggie in the wrong family..honestly, someone is going to an early grave.
This referral situation reminded me of a conversation I had one day at the playground. A woman in my play group who is heavy was watching me and Maggie when she was about 18 months old. She had climbed up some 15 foot play structure and was stuck, and I had to climb up and get her. When I came down, Maggie went up the same structure again and so did I. I couldn't stop her. So, I just kept climbing up behind her keeping her safe until she was worn out. At the end of this whole thing, this woman looked at me and said, "They put that kid in the right family, I couldn't have done that." And you know what, she couldn't have. It was a brave admission on her part.
There are some things bigger people can't do. It doesn't make them better or worse parents, yet their weight increases their risk of injury or illness and in some cases, limits their mobility. Whether we like it or not, it's a fact. And perhaps that is what China was taking into consideration when they refused those dossiers. When I was in China on both adoptions, I saw some really big people carrying around babies, sweating profusely, and I wondered to myself, "Are they going to be ok?" With La Nina, before I was in baby shape, I remember just aching after lugging her around for a day, and I'm not a big person. I'm fairly active. But I was still really hurting. May be China is trying to reduce the risk for both parents and the children they are referred by refusing these families referrals.
China has rules about Gays and Lesbians adopting and it's stated up front. If you're Gay, no need to apply. Many people feel it's discriminatory, yet because it's a policy and sexual preference is easily hidden. There doesn't seem to be much of an outcry about this policy. Would it be ok if China said something similar but used the BMI as the measure? This issue would not be easily skirted. The physical required to adopt asks for height and weight. It would be hard to hide in those pictures too. So, this rule isn't as easy to navigate around as some of the others. Is that why it's so offensive?
I don't know the answers to any of my questions. But my mind has been churning on them lately. And it's always tempered with my deep sympathy for the people rejected after waiting so long.
This whole thing got me thinking, is this new policy offensive because it reeks of discrimination or is it offensive because these people didn't know up front? I know some very heavy people who are wonderful parents. I know some very thin people who are horrible parents. Yet, no one ever said you can only be a parent if you're thin. What if someone did? What if China said, "People adopting must have a body mass index (bmi) under 30?" Most of us are probably guilty of caring a few extra pounds, may be even more than a few extra pounds...do we project ourselves into this scenario too easily for our own comfort? Does it seem too arbitrary? Are we just so politically correct we can't admit that China may have a point from a health perspective?
Let's face it: parenting small children is physically demanding. There is tons of lifting, lots of twisting into unnatural positions, countless hours chasing and more than a few nights spent sleeping (or not sleeping as the case may be) in random positions. This doesn't take into account the bathing, laundering or even lifting of kid stuff like strollers and car seats. With kids under 5, parenting is a highly physical task. Every now and again, parents get referred a wild child like my little one, and if you put a kid like Maggie in the wrong family..honestly, someone is going to an early grave.
This referral situation reminded me of a conversation I had one day at the playground. A woman in my play group who is heavy was watching me and Maggie when she was about 18 months old. She had climbed up some 15 foot play structure and was stuck, and I had to climb up and get her. When I came down, Maggie went up the same structure again and so did I. I couldn't stop her. So, I just kept climbing up behind her keeping her safe until she was worn out. At the end of this whole thing, this woman looked at me and said, "They put that kid in the right family, I couldn't have done that." And you know what, she couldn't have. It was a brave admission on her part.
There are some things bigger people can't do. It doesn't make them better or worse parents, yet their weight increases their risk of injury or illness and in some cases, limits their mobility. Whether we like it or not, it's a fact. And perhaps that is what China was taking into consideration when they refused those dossiers. When I was in China on both adoptions, I saw some really big people carrying around babies, sweating profusely, and I wondered to myself, "Are they going to be ok?" With La Nina, before I was in baby shape, I remember just aching after lugging her around for a day, and I'm not a big person. I'm fairly active. But I was still really hurting. May be China is trying to reduce the risk for both parents and the children they are referred by refusing these families referrals.
China has rules about Gays and Lesbians adopting and it's stated up front. If you're Gay, no need to apply. Many people feel it's discriminatory, yet because it's a policy and sexual preference is easily hidden. There doesn't seem to be much of an outcry about this policy. Would it be ok if China said something similar but used the BMI as the measure? This issue would not be easily skirted. The physical required to adopt asks for height and weight. It would be hard to hide in those pictures too. So, this rule isn't as easy to navigate around as some of the others. Is that why it's so offensive?
I don't know the answers to any of my questions. But my mind has been churning on them lately. And it's always tempered with my deep sympathy for the people rejected after waiting so long.
posted by One Lucky Mom @ 9:29 PM
4 Comments:
At 6:58 AM ,
Johnny said...
I have had this same conversation in my head. I've wondered about the weight issue, as you have, seeing heavyset families at the White Swan. Then, I had to do a PC-mental-slap to my head.
Of course the CCAA is tightening the hoops so that they fewer dossiers to have to match. And, they can do it because they can.
I think as Americans, we're use to the phase, "Hey, that's not fair!". And then, sometimes we sue to get our fair share of the pie.
In this case, whatcha gonna do? Nothing because CCAA makes the rules and moves the lines back and forth according to their whims.
As for hiding the sexual orientation, that's a whole 'nother can of worms.
As I've advised those who ask me my a$$vice about adopting from China, the two things Asians are very uncool about are: 1) homosexuality and 2) mental illness
At 9:20 AM ,
M3 said...
I think you hit the nail on the head about this one being so shocking because they waited 10 months to tell these poor people. Frankly we're all at China's mercy and they can make any crappy rules that they want and make us jump through whatever hoops they want. But it does seem particularly cruel not to let people know what the hoops look like up front.
At 5:45 PM ,
JT said...
really like the blog and have been lurking for quite sometime.
i don't want to be considered a "flamer" but what you said about lgbt folk is pretty off-base- there was, and is, a huge outcry from our population when this rule came up after the sydney olympics. differently than size, orientation is not something you can change or hope to change legitimately.
and though some "hide" how do we explain that to our children? that their homecountry wouldn't have wanted them with us so we hid who we were to adopt you. what does that say about the importance of culture and identity and about how we raise our children? how about respect for birthcountry culture and respect for self and family identity?
the size thing is frustrating (korea has had rules on the book about weight forever), the wait for referals is frustruating, the fact that some many little ones are without families is the worst of all and I know you understand that from what i've read on this blog.
just wanted to comment
At 6:10 PM ,
One Lucky Mom said...
My apologies if my statement regarding the lgbt community were offensive. I was trying to be supportive of that community.
The rules for lgbt changed right after we returned from China with La Nina and it was/is tragic.
No, I don't think anyone should have to hide their orientation or health history. I just wonder if the fact there is "a work around" for lgbt means the sympathy from the general population has waned.
Good parents come in all different shapes, sizes and sexual orientation. And thank you for not flaming me.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home